Skip to main content

About your Search

20130204
20130212
STATION
MSNBC 9
MSNBCW 9
CSPAN 6
CSPAN2 5
KNTV (NBC) 2
CNBC 1
CNN 1
CNNW 1
FBC 1
KCSM (PBS) 1
KQED (PBS) 1
KQEH (PBS) 1
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 55
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 56 (some duplicates have been removed)
that is a loss in trying to create a bipartisan foreign policy in washington and the reduction was probably one of the most important congressional initiatives that we have ever seen. the idea that you could take that kind of money from the defense budget that didn't make the military very happy and apply it to demilitarizing the strategic arsenal of the former soviet union was extremely important. we go from bush to clinton, clinton didn't want to deal with foreign policy like so many presidents they felt they were elected to do domestic things. clinton had no background in foreign policy, no interest in the foreign policy. people say they went to georgetown, the school really wasn't good enough as i am concerned. i hope i am not offending anyone in georgetown she put together a security team all of them were gone within a year or two for the most part when you look at christopher and the cia was a very peculiar appointment. he did something that needs to be corrected. he was in the foreign policy bureaucracy as i am concerned he brought to the right wing and abolishing the arms control and di
? that was president obama as a candidate in 2007, running hard against the legacy of the bush-cheney foreign policy. at issue now today the 700% rampup of drone strikes under obama. there have been 350 under obama, largely in pakistan. a key question is blowback, no one knows how many untargeted civilians have been killed by drone strikes or the damage to winning hearts and mind over there. the effect of blowback is a central theme in the television series "homeland" where the main character goes from captured marine to terrorist himself when the son of his kaptur in iraq is killed by a thrown. they watch the american vice president on tv together after that drone strike. >> the images being broadcast on some outlets around the world are the bodies of 83 dead children, allegedly killed in the strike. we believe to be false. created by the terrorists for propaganda purposes. >> and they call us terrorists. chris: they call us terrorists there. david, there's the question, i guess, maybe not the most important question but we're all asking right now. collateral damage. people killed in these drone st
and didn't because he was so, quote, strong on foreign policy. >> you say, quote. that's why i voted for him. i trusted george bush to make hard, tough decisions that i thought john kerry might waver on. >> thank you. which is why i don't think obama will have any problem with this. >> i think it helps him. >> he'll look like a strong, and just like he did a year ago, just like when he killed bin laden, he looks incredibly strong on foreign policy. and this will not provide a weak spot for him in the long run. >> mika, really quickly, i agree with you there. i don't think there's going to be a political fallout from it. >> yeah. >> i think one of the things that disturbs me so much is the fact that americans are not any more concerned about other americans being able to be targeted and killed without any due process. and i'll say it again because i can hear people saying, well, why didn't you say that about george w. bush? i did. i did on padilla. i did when there were americans whose constitutional rights were being eviscerated by what was going on during the bush era. i spoke out t
rice. there's a controversy. we have republicans who are in a weird position on foreign policy and national security precisely because the president has been so aggressive. in a lot of ways there's not a lot of daylight between what republicans do in the same position as democrats. unless we're bipartisan, there is a lot of people in particular, chuck hagel as defense secretary nominee, and there has been some talk by some in the gop leadership that they will filibuster his nomination. john mccain saying he won't. what is your read on all that many. >> i think it will be a very interesting move to filibuster. it will be a drastic move. wron if you guys saw, but carl livin said he will hold a vote on the nomination tomorrow, so they are moving ahead with it. my hunch is that they won't because i think deep down inside republican senators believe that a president does deserve to choose his advisors, and i think it sets a bad press debt because one day there will be a republican in the white house again. maybe not, i guess. the venom from republican senators towards chuck hagel is
peace and transformation in the region. we have made an important foreign policy shift, both in terms of process and engagement in the region. it is grounded for the first time in our history in the bedrock of consent and legitimacy and many stakeholders in the making of foreign policy. this is a first for pakistan including our relationship with the united states, which is pretty much run by parliamentary guidelines. it does empower us to make decisions that are sustainable, we hope. and we look for a relationship that as long lasting and not just a function of our relationship with the united states on afghanistan as the transition out of the region. >> thank you for that. did they offer you breakfast? >> yes, they did. >> oh, ok. i was so busy taking notes. a couple of questions and i will turn it over to my colleagues. i want to ask about the impact, if any, that having john kerry as secretary of state is going to have. what is your sense of the importance, if any, of his appointment? >> i think that pakistan-u.s. relations are vital to both countries and we appreciate very much t
.c., foreign policy, the sad truth about benghazi. the cia director john brennan and his support for drone bombings to kill american traitors and we might get into waterboarding as well. first up the automatic sequester spending cuts set to kick in in three weeks. outgoing secretary of defense leon pan et offered these dire warning today before congress. take a listen. >> frankly one of the greatest security risks we are now facing as a nation that, this budget uncertainty could prompt the most significant readiness -- military readiness crisis in more than a decade. >> all right. but there are ways to responsibly trim the pentagon's budget and still protect national security. former defense undersecretary michelle flournoy, if identify got that right -- michelle flournoy, i beg your pardon, she penned an op-ed in the wall street journal this week. joining us is aforementioned michele flournoy. michelle, or undersecretary, which ever you prefer -- >> michelle, please. >> i thought your piece was terrific. sequester or not, defense department is going to lose 10% of its budget and you think
foreign policy and military policy on the basis of drones. lou: let's take a look at the drawn strikes that accelerated markedly, dramatically under president obama from the bush years. freaky put that up to show how it is grown. 352 drone strikes in pakistan and yemen under president obama. 352, and in 63 in given since 2009. one strike under president bush. 289 strikes in pakistan verses 45 and the bush. last week, we only take such actions as a last resort to save lives. any actions will be legally grounded, the early anchored in intelligence. what does that sound like a rehearsed line? what the implications if he is confirmed? and i want to add one thing to this issue. a new website. a new website to me. coming out with this report that part of the problems that we are creating, the cia under david patraeus moving toward special operations instead of carrying out what has been traditionally its responsibility, intelligence gathering. where does all of this ploy? >> they always had two sides of the house. operations and intelligence analysis side. the strikes, the drone strikes at t
, but they said the air strike was aimed at stopping a shipment of weapons to hezbollah in lebanon. a foreign policy analyst i spoke to earlier, asking if syria wanted to influence. >> israel will claim it does not want to intervene, that this was an action against militants, but if you look at israel's real strategy, if you put yourself in the shoes of the prime minister's national security advisers and you wanted to buttress the regime of the dictator assad because you prefer that to a democracy, the one action you would take would be an attack on the regime. it seems counterintuitive, but it is not. this lends legitimacy to bashar al-assad. from israel's perspective this seems likely. >> is it likely israel consulted washington before it attacked? >> my understanding is israel did not inform washington it was going to do this. the united states check the box and said, we support israel's right to defend itself. this was not israel defending itself. this was a pre-emptive action, and i just have to believe people in washington are quite disturbed by it. it came during hagel hearings and was
box right? >> such a key component of obama's foreign policy has been we're going to slip in across borders, we're going to do covert actions kill who we need to kill as we view that. it is extremely -- you know, these kind of things, the way these things operate the machinery behind it when you read this memo, i mean this is what you would call, you know, a barnburner scoop. this is actually amazing stuff to see this written down in black and white the way the government does this. >> bill: again i think liberals progressives, would be raising holy hell if george bush and dick cheney -- if this were their policy demanding at least to know what the guidelines are. i think we should be equally strong, i believe in making that demand. even if it's president obama and joe biden. their policy. because this is a big deal. and you know -- >> if you think guys likewide-do that? -- wyden will do that? >> bill: he wrote letters saying we want to see all of the memos on drone policy and we want to see what the guidelines are. what rules you are following. and i think the american people deser
in collaboration with foreign policy and lot of other conferences and public cay i guesses around south ashane affairs. so anyway, we are pleased to have out indication to bring us together and the purpose to have a serious discussion about the idea and subjects that are in the book than are obviously still alive. as d.a. lem ma for american foreign policy. let me introduce peter and welcome him to the podium. thank you. [applause] thank you steven. thank you for all of you coming today and for c-span for covering this. steve was instrumental in making this project happen. i'm grateful to him. thank you to oxford university press which published the book and did a fine job in terms of presenting the material. thank you also to my coed or it katherine and thanks to people here at the foundation brian fishman, patrick doughty, jennifer i believe you were involved in making the book possible. steve indicated the reason we thought the project was necessary a series of papers not as the command stormed on the stage out of the woods of cambodia in the 1970s had a movement become so important yet at
really is in american foreign policy. tonight on special report, one republican senator says the president must be held accountable for his leadership in the aftermath of last fall's benghazi terror attack. on thursday defense secretary leon panetta struggled to explain the president's lack of involvement during the crisis. >>> america could be energy independent in the coming years. advances in technology such as fracking and horizontal drilling have increased natural gas production by 27% in the last four years. there's positive news tonight about the housing industry. we'll hear from the chief economist for government lender freddie mac. >>> the search goes on tonight for a former lapd cop suspected of going on a shooting rampage, killing three people. special report from washington starts at 6:00 eastern righ. right now, back to new york and the five. >> a new study from kansas state finds people who use the internet at work spend most of the time doing things unrelated to their job, a if h phenomenonn as cyber loafing. i say forget the impact on work. how does it affect
get away. went into iraq. when you look at how he conducted foreign policy between iraq and afghanistan and how this president has gotten us out of iraq and afghanistan, gotten bin laden and is certainly a lot less casualties than we've been having but that being said, you know chris, we should have a legal expert out on what makes you an american citizen or not or whether that makes you an enemy combatant, i don't know. >> well, you know, also we created al-qaeda since osama bin laden and ha deem to go after the soviets in afghanistan. we really have nothing to complain about. we put that all in motion. >> stephanie: richard in chicago. >> caller: good morning. i think -- i'm a big obama supporter but this is just wrong. i do feel like -- and i'm not going to blame this -- this policy is an obama policy. the escalation of drones. it has been happening. you know i just think it is a slippery slope where it turns into a convenient way to intervene, you know. you can withdraw from afghanistan and iraq without using drones. this is just an escalation of his policy and you k
an important foreign policy shift both in terms of process and engagement in the region. when i say process i say that it is grounded for the first time in our history in the bedrock of parliamentry consent, public legitimacy, and many stakeholders that matter being onboard in the manging of foreign policy. so this is a first for pakistan, including our relationship with the united states, which is now pretty much run by parliamentry guidelines, and we move affording to those now, which does empower us to take decisions that are sustainable, we hope. and we look for a relationship that is long lasting and not just a function of our relationship with the united states and pakistan as it transitions after the region. >> thank you for that. did they offer you breakfast? >> yes, they did. >> so busy taking notes. let me ask you one or two and move to my colleagues. you were early in offering congratulations to john kerry. i wanted to ask you about the impact if any you see kerry moving in as secretary of state is going to have. as you know the "wall street journal" ran an oped piece last week tal
against foreign persons, i think, is troubling from a moral, ethical, and policy point of view. but i don't subscribe to the fact that it's illegal under u.s. law. and that's the law that the president is bound by the constitution to follow. my focus has been primarily, and i'm not saying it's a good program. i'm just saying that i think it's a moral policy question rather than a legal one primarily for the president. i focus primarily on the targeted killing of american citizens, which does bring into play the united states constitution and the rule of law in the united states. and i'm very troubled about that aspect of it. >> can you help us understand how this official program of targeted killing works? >> apparently, the agencies, primarily the pentagon and the c.i.a. nominate people to be on the list. and it goes through what the white house promises is a very rigorous process of review to determine if those people should or should not be on the list. we don't know exactly what the standard is. but it involves a number of criteria, including whether the host country, the country in w
for both the law, for our foreign policy, and for civilians in a killing program that we should be doubly concerned in getting that information out there, so that we make sure that we don't make those mistakes or we correct them when we do. >> let's close with a brief discussion on the issue of surveillance and eavesdropping. on the 31st of december, the president extended this controversial wiretapping act until 2017. the f.i.s.a. act? >> foreign intelligence rveiance act. >> rig. are you both troubled by the seeming lack of oversight for this extension of surveillance and wiretapping of suspected terrorists in this country? do you think there's a real danger here? >> i think there's a tremendous danger. and i think, you know there has been a codification of the expansion of power under george bush. and so any time that congress or through policies that are happening now that we're institutionalizing, codifying, making hard in our infrastructure things at we lirally thkable n or 11 years ago is of tremendous concern to us. it shows our slippage. and we don't always realize that that's wh
and it is the lasting legacy of foreign policy. >> and that leave mes with the question because of so many ideological differences of president obama and president bush, but not on this. it suggests possibilities that presidents are just presidents and they always expand their kind of war powers which is one possibility, and the other is that the president nose something that i don't know about what constitutes threats to the national security, and the third is that well, on this one question, this president is just as hawk ish as george w. bush and any way to adjudicate the possibilities of what war means to the obama administration? >> well, i think that, i think that is absolutely right, it has been a continuation of the bush administration policies, and yes, administrations always try to push the outer bounds of the authority. but one thank is clear is that the laws of war have not changed even if the practice has changed. there are really three reasons that a country can, a state can use force outside of its borders. one, if it is the victim of an armed attack and second if the u.n. security coun
troubled by it, as someone who's served in the white house on foreign policy. what bothered you the most about the way it was put together? >> let's separate it into two sets of issues. one is the criteria for when the united states does say a drone attack and the other is the process by which we make the specific decision. the criteria are simply not sustainable. for example, there's three. the first with is that it has to be imminent, the idea that the terrorists planning an attack are about to launch an attack. we don't know that. so you can't meet the first threshold you set. we don't wait till it's imminent because we never know. and that's clear if you look at all the drone strikes we've done, by the time someone has made the career choice to be a terrorist, we decide that they qualify as a potential target. indeed we go beyond that. so-called signature strikes, you target people who appear to be doing the sorts of things that terrorists tend to do. we set up criteria that we ourselves do not meet. we then say it has to be the capture is infeasible. you don't want to have to captur
to president obama's foreign policy in as far as being able to take out terrorist where is he doesn't have to send u.s. troops and john brennan was an architect of that strategy. of course, controversial because there are innocent civilians who can get caught up in that as "the new york times" written about earlier this week, as well. that's obviously where some of this is coming from but the question americans face is would you rather have american troops and boots on the ground in yemen and pakistan or the unmanned drones taking on this responsibility? >> thank you very much. i appreciate you changing conversations in the middle of everything. we'll have plenty of time i'm sure to talk about chuck hagel. meantime, let's take the audience to the senate hearing and senator dianne feinstein. >> because of the added importance of having steady leadership at an organization that conducts most of its business outside of the public arena. intelligence is critical to the successful draw down in afghanistan, to the brutal war going on within's syria's borders, across north africa where the attack
dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam? were you correct or incorrect? >> my -- >> yes or no. >> my reference to -- >> are you answering the question, senator hagel? the question is were you right or wrong? that's a pretty straightforward question. >> well -- >> i would like to answer whether you were right or wrong and then you are free to elaborate. >> well, i'm not going to give you a yes or no answer -- >> well, let the record show that you refuse to answer that question. now please go ahead. >> welcome back to "hardball." that was senator john mccain grilling his old friend chuck hagel last week at hagel's confirmation hearing. the senate armed services committee was supposed to vote today on hagel's nomination to head the pentagon, but that vote has been postponed after republicans said they hadn't received sufficient information about hagel's financial records and specifically about any payments he's received from foreign sources. that's an odd hurdle given that republicans never seem concerned about foreign revenue sources when it came to nominees from
of a big deal. for anyone who is -- pays attention to american foreign policy and military affairs you know that ever since the attacks on this country on 9/11 the united states has had to evolve militarily and in the intelligence community to meet the challenge of this new enemy and more than anyone i can think of, general mcchrystal has been responsible for shaping the evolution and developing what i call the targeting engine which is what we adopted as the primary method of defending the country. thank you for being here, great to see you. >> thanks for two kind introduction. i thought of you as a nonfiction writer but you have gone into fiction now. >> you were the commander of special operations in iraq and afghanistan and there have been a rapid evolution. i am familiar from writing blackhawk down the way things were nearly 90s. can you give us an idea of the overall strategy that has evolved and we will get to specifics but also the tactics you have developed? >> a group of people did. thanks. taking it back a little bit at the end of the vietnam war as america has done at the end of
means to president obama's legacy, specifically as we discuss foreign policy and the next four years. >> well, it's going to mean a great deal. after all, two of the accomplishments barack obama is trying to claim is going to be getting us out of war in iraq and out of afghanistan, by 2014 we have to withdraw 66,000 troops from afghanistan. now, the military will deal with that. but john kerry will have to do a lot of diplomacy with pakistan, who are not really sure whether we can trust right now. i think that the key for kerry will be when we move equipment and personnel out of afghanistan through the routes to pakistan, kerry can get done deals out of that country that they live up to. >> of course, americans know him as a multiterm congressman, 30 years in congress in the senate. but what do the rest of the people around the world think of, when they think of john kerry? and what message are they getting, as he embarks on a job that will more than likely see them land in one of their countries? >> well, look, hillary clinton just did 1 million miles, that's a lot of transit for se
regional transformation in the region. they've made a foreign policy shift in terms of process and when i say process, i say it is counted for the first time in our history and the bedrock of parliamentary consent, public legitimacy and many stakeholders on board in the making of foreign policy. so this is a first for pakistan, including our relationship with the united states, which is now pretty much run by parliamentary guidelines and remove according to does now, which does empower us to take decisions that are sustainable, we hope come and look for a relationship that is long-lasting and not just a function of our relationship with the united states on afghanistan as the transitions out of the region. >> thank
and as a solar was able to question foreign policy of the united states publicly? >> i think so. we are familiar with that story. here's a man who was an ivy leaguer, who volunteered for vietnam. he won three purple hearts, a silver star and bronze star. as you say he came back and rejected them. he talked about how immoral the war in vietnam was. that played well around the world. there is still swift boat veterans for truth and groups angry at kerry for that. globally that played pretty well. now kerry who is well known by denouncing vietnam, is in charge of getting us out of afghanistan. so there's an ironic link between the two wars. >> i would be remiss if i didn't use this opportunity while you are on live with me to show a long list of all of the books that you have written, and one of them happens to be the biography of rosa parks. today would be rosa parks 100th birthday. there is a commemorative stamp being released today. it's a significant moment in u.s. history. what are some of the more surprising things, that you learned about rosa parks, in all of your research for the biography?
hope you all look at the article written january 17 in "foreign policy" magazine about aegis and the problems that have surfaced about them. now i have talked to patrick kennedy about this and his staff has come over and briefed my staff that they believe aegis is doing just fine. . >> i won't go into the i.g. report on the background checks. but the people that are at kabul now, it is $100 million a year we are paying them. i can't believe we can't use the marines in these situations. someone has got to do a cost benefit analysis. can you imagine the amount of money we have spent fooling around with these contractors that weren't getting the job done? can you imagine the time we have spent on this and the money that has been spent? i would like for you, general, to talk about the cost benefit of putting marines in our embassies and why in the world this is hard for us to get our arms around and where is the analysis that shows us we are saving any money. >> just to react briefly to what would be necessarily a much longer conversation. the marines are not -- that's not their
, republican -- one comes in and another goes out. nothing seems to change. it is the exact same foreign policy. it is almost like there is an unseen hand behind both parties. host: do you think you have been given full information about what is happening with the use of drones? do you want to know more about what the u.s. is doing or do you feel like you know enough? caller: what i have seen it, -- abc, cbs, all that a -- i mean, we will never know what they are doing with them. but my main concern, since i've lived in america and i am an american, is there are plans to have drones patrolling our skies. homeland security has ordered drones. they say they are just for surveillance, but it is not a good idea to have remote- control -- heavy ever read "1984" by george orwell? it started like that. you can't have so much power congregated in so few hands. it is in its power to have not only surveillance from the air but also bombing capability, remote-controlled bombing capability. and the decisions made by just a very few people. over a whole population -- it is even passed what george orwell cou
. you can't, you know, conduct foreign policy declarations by league things to the media. that can't be your oversight. there has to be something. >> jennifer daskal from georgetown eun jerts and jeremy scahill and hina and jeremy epstein. >> we're joined by paul krugman on what he wants to hear in the president's state of the union address right after this. you h. your doctor will say get smart about your weight. i tried weight loss plans... but their shakes aren't always made for people with diabetes. that's why there's glucerna hunger smart shakes. they have carb steady, with carbs that digest slowly to help minimize blood sugar spikes. and they have six grams of sugars. with fifteen grams of protein to help manage hunger... look who's getting smart about her weight. [ male announcer ] glucerna hunger smart. a smart way to help manage hunger and diabetes. and you'll dump your old mop. but don't worry, he'll find someone else. ♪ who's that lady? ♪ who's that lady? ♪ sexy lady ♪ who's that lady? [ female announcer ] used mops can grow bacteria. swiffer wetjet starts with a
in the region, we have made an important foreign policy shift, both in terms of process and engagement and i say that it is grounded for the first time in our history and the bedrock of parliamentary consent, public legitimacy and many stakeholders that matter the mount board. this is a first for pakistan, including our relationship with the united states, which is pretty much run by parliamentary guidelines and remove according to those now, which doesn't power us to take decisions that are sustainable and we let our relationship that is long-lasting and not just a function of our relationship in the united states and afghanistan as it transitions out of the region. >> today offer you breakfast quite >> yesterday. >> are so busy taking notes. let me ask you a noble move to our colleagues. graduations to john kerry, i wanted to ask you at the impact of moving the secretary of state is going to have. as you know "the wall street journal" ran an op-ed piece last week talking about how at least the view in india is kerry told stories pakistan. what is your sense of the importance of any of kerry's
secretary kerry said as he addressed the audience here this morning. he has a wealth of foreign policy experience he brings to the job of course but also many years as a public speaker and like the best them he began here this morning with a few good jokes. >> i have to tell you, i liked my cubicle over there in transition corner. [laughter] >> but i cannot tell you how great it feels to sort of be liberated to know that i actually get to explore the whole building now. [laughter] >> so i've been freed. i'm the first person you guys freda, this is pretty good. [laughter] >> the nation's 68th secretary of state is the first child of a career foreign service officer to lead the department of state. secretary kerry told officials here at the harry s. truman building that he will advocate for them and they will embark together on a great adventure. >> we get to try to make peace in a world where there is far too much conflict and far too much killing. there are alternatives. we get to lift people out of poverty. we get to try to cure disease, we get to try to empower people with human righ
casualties, which causes rep percussions to u.s. foreign policy around the world. host: our next call comes from minnesota on our line for democrats. caller: i would like to speak to comments about how people feel about the world who have had these drones tracks, the service men who see this happening around them. what i feel about the throne strikes for killing -- drones tried for killing americans overseas -- drone strikes for killing americans, i have empathy with these drones strikes occur and i hope nobody is killed or hurt. it is not just foreigners who were killing the best we are killing with drones. we are killing americans -- who we are killing which drones. we are killing americans to if they are traitors. i hope they understand-- too if they are traitors. host: does it matter if it is a u.s. citizen or a foreign national it started in the stunted killings -- in these targeted killings? guest: americans have been less concerned with it has not been americans. that raises questions that did not exist under the american constitution. foreigners outside the united states do not have
efforts to rebuild trust. diplomatic sources in beijing say the foreign ministry summoned north korean's ambassador to persuade pyongyang to exercise restraint on the issue. the north rejected china's demand. the row appears to underscore north korea's uncompromising stance on nuclear policy. >>> iran's supreme leader ayatollah khomeini rejected a proposal for direct talks with the united states, saying the country is pushing negotiations with the threat of military force. khomeini spoke on thursday in the capital tehran. the supreme leader say that u.s. politicians should know that pressure and negotiation are not compatible. he also said the ball is in the u.s. court, suggesting he wants to see further action by the country. his remarks came days after u.s. vice president joe biden said the united states is prepared to hold bilateral negotiations with tehran, if the talks are real and tangible. negotiators from iran and six major powers including the u.s. will resume talks on february 26th. after an eight-month suspension to discuss iran's nuclear program. >>> mario draghi said he ex
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 56 (some duplicates have been removed)